The İstanbul 10th High Criminal Court has made a historic judgment in the Balyoz investigation.
Above all, the civilized society and the Turkish democracy are indebted to the people (most probably military servicemen) who have taken steps to make sure the documents used in the investigation are publicized, the Taraf daily and its staff who proved brave enough to publish these documents, the prosecutors who have initiated the process based on these documents and the judges who have remained decisive, despite all attempts and efforts of intimidation and threat. The people should also be grateful to the government, which has held a referendum to deal with the state of co-optation and all the democrats from different backgrounds who have extended support to the government’s initiative. Hopefully, this will be a start rather than an end and Turkey makes progress and follows the path that Argentina, Greece, Spain and Chile have taken in the past to become members of the civilized world.
There are two sides to every conviction. One side concerns the convict and his or her relatives and the second social justice. There is an ongoing tragedy on the first side. The conviction of military servicemen who have been in the army for many years is just saddening for them and their relatives. I wish them prudence and patience. From the perspective of society and democracy, we could refer to the delivery of justice and the establishment of control over armed bureaucracy. The pain and agony of the first group does not undermine or devalue the demand and rights of the second for justice. In fact, those who attempted to stage a coup should have been punished many years ago (take the Sept. 12 coup). And the armed military servicemen who have violated the law and abused the power they held to advance their goals should have been held accountable. Unfortunately, we have come to this point very late.
Criticism in response to the ruling
Some criticisms are being raised against the case. Some of them could be taken seriously; but some others may be considered worthless based on the principles of law, ethics, justice and democracy. Of course, the Balyoz case has a political dimension because the purpose of the investigation is to protect democracy vis-à-vis the armed servicemen. In a country that has experienced a number of coups in its past, it is hard to be surprised that many high-ranking military officers have embraced the political culture of making a coup. Unfortunately, the armed forces suffer from a tendency of making coups. With a few exceptions, you could notice this in a brief conversation with a general. Due to the spread of the disease and its normalization over time, the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) failed to create an internal inspection mechanism that would prevent pro-coup structures. If the military could have done this and taken effective measures against the coup attempters in 2003, there would have been no need for investigations and cases like Balyoz. External intervention has become a necessity because of the lack of such measures. The judiciary, which has been able to deal with the domination of democratic politics and bureaucratic pressures, has in the end collectively done this.
The efforts and attempts to present the case as having no legality have occurred by external dynamics. It is of course true that the US has played some role in the coups, but this does not eliminate the responsibility of the military servicemen. Otherwise, we have to admit that the military generals are puppets controllable by their masters who have no power or will to do anything. The main dynamics were domestic. The case was held in accordance with the Turkish Criminal Code and it was concluded based on this. It is possible that there have been some procedural mistakes and errors not peculiar to this case that would hopefully be corrected at the appeals stage. But the case was transparent; it took place publicly and it was concluded swiftly. Despite the fact that the judiciary was inexperienced in such cases and there were attempts of disinformation during the process, the case was handled properly.
Legitimacy of the evidence
The argument that some of the evidence in the case is fake and unauthentic is a thesis in the eyes of the relatives of the defendants and the defense lawyers that has become truth by frequent repetition. Even though arguments over authenticity seem plausible for some of the electronic evidence, the voice recordings, original signed documents, journals and witness testimonies were sufficient to allow the court to pass judgment. In addition, according to some experts who have followed the case, it is not hard to explain the inconsistencies in time and information. The armed forces take a record of everything and update these records on a periodic basis. Even the plans of the Sept. 12 coup are still in archives and they are kept ready as a prototype coup plan. The army sees these things as part of its institutional memory. Besides, if some of the documents are unauthentic, the defense is responsible for proving that. Reasoning is not sufficient to substantiate the claims. Who have produced these fake documents? And how do they know the armed forces so well? Why do they target the defendants of this case and not others? How come they plant these documents in the least known places within the military buildings? Why do the former chiefs of staff (like Işık Koşaner) complain about the leaking of these documents rather than about their inauthenticity?
Some argue the coup as a whole is an operation against the armed forces and that the military is being weakened by this. It is obvious the case is relevant to some figures from the military not to the entire military in terms of charges. It is, however, necessary and proper that the case would have comprehensive results on the coup tradition within the Turkish armed forces. If the military, which has been suffering from the coup virus over the past decades, sincerely attempts to take action to remove this virus from its body, it may march towards becoming a truly democratic institution. And in this case, it may become even more powerful. In this way, it may focus on its real job and perform its original duties. From this perspective, I should note this is something by which those who truly love the armed forces should be pleased about.
*Atilla Yayla is a political scientist.
(Today’s Zaman)
